M1 Carbine shooter wins National Match with it.

[Rattler]

8 hours ago, wildcat junkie said:

What was the first "battle rifle" that could have the magazine topped off in a "ready to fire" conduction?

Ready to fire is defined as a closed bolt with a cartridge in the chamber.

I suspect it was the .30-40 Krag

[wildcat junkie]

6 hours ago, Rattler said:

Not sure why you ask.  Although not in the "ready to fire" mode, the 03 could be topped off without a problem.  So could the Thompson, 1911 an M2 .50 cal.  None but the 1911 were ready to fire when doing so.  The Garand certainly wasn't ready to fire when loaded at any time.  The M1 carbine could be ready to fire when topped off with a new mag.  Advantage, M1 Carbine.

1) I asked because you brought up the fact that the Garrand could not be topped off.

2) The '03 can't be topped off without opening the bolt. 

3) Neither the 1911 nor the Thomson is a "battle rifle" and the M2 certainly isn't.

4) The correct answer precedes all of those. And it did not have a detachable magazine.

Edited September 29, 2018 by wildcat junkie

[wildcat junkie]

Didn't see your last post until after I replied.

Yes it was the 30/40 Krag.

Some could argue that the Spencer Carbine and Henry rifle,  both of which were used during the Civil War, would meet that criteria,  but neither was issued in large numbers and the Spencer was a carbine while the Henry was a low powered rimfire.

[wildcat junkie]

13 hours ago, wildcat junkie said:

223 is a whole different ball game. with FMJ bullets it can be more deadly than the 30-06 loaded with the same type projectile.. The light bullet traveling at 300+ fps is more likely to tumble or otherwise make an erratic, larger wound cavity than a heavy 30 caliber bullet. Again the original posts were about man stopping capabilities military ammo.

 

11 hours ago, Storm914 said:

223 being more deadly then 30-06 in FMJ never heard that one before like to here what buckmaster has to say about that or others that have played around with both   have to say I find that statement hard to believe. 

Not saying you are wrong just dont know have not seen anything about that .

 

I didn't say it "was more deadly", but I did say it "could be more deadly". 30-06 has far more energy, but on a soft tissue hit with a FMJ bullet, most of that energy would be wasted as the bullet plows through and continues beyond. The 5.56 FMJ is far more likely to expend all of its energy inside the body.

It's subjective, not a definitive statement.

[Hunter007]

26 minutes ago, wildcat junkie said:

 

I didn't say it "was more deadly", but I did say it "could be more deadly". 30-06 has far more energy, but on a soft tissue hit with a FMJ bullet, most of that energy would be wasted as the bullet plows through and continues beyond. The 5.56 FMJ is far more likely to expend all of its energy inside the body.

It's subjective, not a definitive statement.

What about the Hydro Static Shock of a .30 cal bullet going through the  body ? Isn't that going to do more tissue damage then a smaller bullet ? Because both are going past the speed of sound. 

Once again not saying I'm right and your wrong because I never tested it or seen the two FMJ s tested like that before .

I really dont know the answer but my bet is on the bigger bullet why ? Bigger bullet bigger hole for starters .

Edited September 29, 2018 by Storm914

[wildcat junkie]

2 hours ago, Storm914 said:

What about the Hydro Static Shock of a .30 cal bullet going through the  body ? Isn't that going to do more tissue damage then a smaller bullet ? Because both are going past the speed of sound. 

Once again not saying I'm right and your wrong because I never tested it or seen the two FMJ s tested like that before .

I really dont know the answer but my bet is on the bigger bullet why ? Bigger bullet bigger hole for starters .

A smaller bullet will expend energy faster, especially if it is easily deflected from the normal path and it becomes unstable enough to yaw or even turn 180 degrees or more as it is moving on through..

A 230gr .535 lead round ball @ 2000 fps has less energy than a 220gr .308 bullet @ 2400 fps but I've seen .535 round balls hit deer at close range with reactions/results that far exceed anything I've seen with either a 12 ga  RS or various CF bullets. A round ball dumps its energy faster than just about any other projectile.

 

All of those factors also play into the hydrostatic shock. A projectile that is pointed and does not expand will not dump energy very fast. It will retain the energy even as it passes through soft tissue and will still have retained a lot of energy as it exits. That energy is wasted.

Edited September 29, 2018 by wildcat junkie